Word of the day-- INEPTOCRACY

[msgt/ret]

New Word INEPTOCRACY

Could not find it in my old Webster's. Googled it and discovered it is a recently "coined" new word found on a T shirt on eBay. Getting really close to the bone! Read this one over slowly and absorb the facts that totally are within this sentence!

I love this word and believe that it will become a recognized English word.
Finally, a word to describe our current political situation.

Ineptocracy (in-ep-toc'-ra-cy) - a system of government where the least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing; and, where the members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a diminishing number of producers.

[DefensiveCarry.com]

[Badey]

New Word INEPTOCRACY

Could not find it in my old Webster's. Googled it and discovered it is a recently "coined" new word found on a T shirt on eBay. Getting really close to the bone! Read this one over slowly and absorb the facts that totally are within this sentence!

I love this word and believe that it will become a recognized English word.
Finally, a word to describe our current political situation.

I like it! It reminds me of an old joke:

Q: What's the opposite of a pro?

A: Con.

Q: What's the opposite of progress?

A: Congress!

[apvbguy]

there is a movie called idiocracy, google it and try and get a copy, it is all too real

[Arborigine]

there is a movie called idiocracy, google it and try and get a copy, it is all too real

One of Mike Judge's best, as good as "Office Space", but with a scary message. Grow a thick skin and do NOT watch it on Comedy Channel, like "Blazing Saddles", the censors kill the jokes.

[claude clay]

re the peter principle though it says in a third fewer words what
i've been on about for the past 10 years. i am so po'ed as to how my tax money is taken and wasted
to support a system whose MJO seems to be its own continuance.

how much can we take before 'they' get too angry...
and how how much of that money can we keep for ourselves while at the
same time how little can we do without overly dissing the taxpayer into acting
for their own good--which would be contray proletariat ideals

----well, something along them lines

[retsupt99]

Appear to fit pretty well with our present day situation...until 20 Jan '13.

[jblives2ride]

Love that word going to spread it around

[Hiram25]

Sad but true!

[Hopyard]

Nothing new under the sun. The same complaints were being made from the dawn of our nation.

It is somewhat foolish to claim intellectual deficits in our leaders when almost all of them are self-made and highly
educated. We may call them idiots, but clearly they are far from that.

"Inept" probably should is a term we apply only because we haven't walked a mile in
their shoes and had to make the difficult decisions they make.

Truman-- self made man
Ike- well educated, worked way up through the military ranks
Kennedy-- highly educated, high intellect
Johnson--self-made, well educated though not Ivy League or Military Academy level
Nixon- self-made, well educated, long political career, attorney
Ford-- ordinary beginnings in life, worked his way up in politics, well educated
Carter-- brainiac with the smarts to understand nuclear physics, self-made and self-propelled as a politician
Reagan-- self-made man, I'm uncertain about his formal education but he was not uneducated
GHWB--high level intellect, Yale graduate, successful business man.
Clinton-- high level intellect, self-made political career, Yale law degree
GWB-- for all the jokes about him, high intellect if incurious, M.S. from Harvard
Obama-- self-made political career; high intellect; Harvard law degree and law professor

Its fun to call our leaders names. But "idiot" or "inept" doesn't apply.

see my signature line

[mcp1810]

Poli= many or multiple

Ticks= blood sucking parasites

Politics......

[apvbguy]

Nothing new under the sun. The same complaints were being made from the dawn of our nation.

It is somewhat foolish to claim intellectual deficits in our leaders when almost all of them are self-made and highly
educated. We may call them idiots, but clearly they are far from that.

"Inept" probably should is a term we apply only because we haven't walked a mile in
their shoes and had to make the difficult decisions they make.

Truman-- self made man
Ike- well educated, worked way up through the military ranks
Kennedy-- highly educated, high intellect
Johnson--self-made, well educated though not Ivy League or Military Academy level
Nixon- self-made, well educated, long political career, attorney
Ford-- ordinary beginnings in life, worked his way up in politics, well educated
Carter-- brainiac with the smarts to understand nuclear physics, self-made and self-propelled as a politician
Reagan-- self-made man, I'm uncertain about his formal education but he was not uneducated
GHWB--high level intellect, Yale graduate, successful business man.
Clinton-- high level intellect, self-made political career, Yale law degree
GWB-- for all the jokes about him, high intellect if incurious, M.S. from Harvard
Obama-- self-made political career; high intellect; Harvard law degree and law professor

Its fun to call our leaders names. But "idiot" or "inept" doesn't apply.

see my signature line

I can assure you that while the charlatan that currently is in charge is probably a very intelligent person he is very inept at the the job of governing this nation. He is incompetent in the economic/financial arena and inept in dealing with the other nations in the world. he is encumbered by some false sense of victim hood regarding his alleged kenyon background, hence the disrespect for our strongest ally in the world, the UK. I can go on and on but I suspect you are one of his sycophants who is incapable of understanding obuma's many short comings, for his supposedly being the smartest man in the room, he has really screwed the pooch with his attempts to ruin this great nation.

[varob]

Nothing new under the sun. The same complaints were being made from the dawn of our nation.

It is somewhat foolish to claim intellectual deficits in our leaders when almost all of them are self-made and highly
educated. We may call them idiots, but clearly they are far from that.

"Inept" probably should is a term we apply only because we haven't walked a mile in
Their shoes and had to make the difficult decisions they make.

Truman-- self made man
Ike- well educated, worked way up through the military ranks
Kennedy-- highly educated, high intellect
Johnson--self-made, well educated though not Ivy League or Military Academy level
Nixon- self-made, well educated, long political career, attorney
Ford-- ordinary beginnings in life, worked his way up in politics, well educated
Carter-- brainiac with the smarts to understand nuclear physics, self-made and self-propelled as a politician
Reagan-- self-made man, I'm uncertain about his formal education but he was not uneducated
GHWB--high level intellect, Yale graduate, successful business man.
Clinton-- high level intellect, self-made political career, Yale law degree
GWB-- for all the jokes about him, high intellect if incurious, M.S. from Harvard
Obama-- self-made political career; high intellect; Harvard law degree and law professor

Its fun to call our leaders names. But "idiot" or "inept" doesn't apply.

see my signature line

Yea Hop, they start out pretty smart. But when they get to Capital Hill or the White House all the smarts they have, automatically leaves there brains.

Oh, but not my guy, he's not the problem!

[Hopyard]

Yea Hop, they start out pretty smart. But when they get to Capital Hill or the White House all the smarts they have, automatically leaves there brains.

Oh, but not my guy, he's not the problem!

Which is actually what people say about their own Critter.

I think people confuse the difficult compromises and decisions which get made within existing very complex law and regulation
with ineptitude or stupidity. I also think there is too much crapola commentary from the gallery--

It might well be time to reconsider the Sedition Act (1798) which never was found unconstitutional. The key element is that the
law was only broken if the statement about government or its leaders was false. We can't run a country in an ept way
when we have a multitude of writers and talking heads second guessing everything on the basis of partial information, misinformation, and outright lies. It is the chorus that makes the leaders seem inept.

[apvbguy]

Which is actually what people say about their own Critter.

I think people confuse the difficult compromises and decisions which get made within existing very complex law and regulation
with ineptitude or stupidity. I also think there is too much crapola commentary from the gallery--

It might well be time to reconsider the Sedition Act (1798) which never was found unconstitutional. The key element is that the
law was only broken if the statement about government or its leaders was false. We can't run a country in an ept way
when we have a multitude of writers and talking heads second guessing everything on the basis of partial information, misinformation, and outright lies. It is the chorus that makes the leaders seem inept.

are you really trying to infringe on my right to say that the illegal in the white house is an incompetent boob who has installed marxists and associates of terrorists in key positions?
I wonder why you didn't address my post directly to me, it is the sycophants like you that will enable a swift decent into a tyrannical
state. what a sad state of affairs.

[Hopyard]

Yes-- Absolutely. If you tell lies you are committing libel. That is not free speech.
We have tolerated it since the beginning, and paid a high price for it as well.

And since you called me a syncophant, on no basis whatsoever as you do not know a thing about me,
it is clear that you are quite willing to libel others.

We can't have good governance when everyone with a keyboard spreads libelous lies.

Here is part of the text:

SECT. 3. And be it further enacted and declared, That if any person shall be prosecuted under this act for the writing or publishing any libel aforesaid, it shall be lawful for the defendant, upon the trial of the cause, to give in evidence in his defence, the truth of the matter contained in the publication charged as a libel. And the jury who shall try the cause shall have a right to determine the law and the fact, under the direction of the court, as in other cases.